Righteousness and Total Depravity

[JusticeMachine]

How do we justify Noah and Abrahman, and David being righteous in Gods sight if Romans is taken litterally?

9 What shall we conclude then? Do we have any advantage? Not at all! For we have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under the power of sin. 10 As it is written:
“There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands;
there is no one who seeks God.
12 All have turned away,
they have together become worthless;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.”[b]
13 “Their throats are open graves;
their tongues practice deceit.”[c]
“The poison of vipers is on their lips.”[d]
14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.”[e]
15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 ruin and misery mark their ways,
17 and the way of peace they do not know.”[f]
18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.”[g]

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.



Genesis 6:9
[ Noah and the Flood ] This is the account of Noah and his family. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked faithfully with God.

Psalm 1:6
For the LORD watches over the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked leads to destruction.

Psalm 5:12
Surely, LORD, you bless the righteous; you surround them with your favor as with a shield.

Psalm 7:11
God is a righteous judge, a God who displays his wrath every day.

Psalm 34:17
The righteous cry out, and the LORD hears them; he delivers them from all their troubles.

Psalm 34:19
The righteous person may have many troubles, but the LORD delivers him from them all;

Genesis 15:6
6 Abram believed the LORD, and he credited it to him as righteousness.

[The Remonstrant]

It is important to remember that no human being is ever declared to be absolutely righteous (i.e., sinless or without sin) throughout the Scriptures but Jesus. Noah and Abraham, for example, are two men who are noted for their exceptional personal righteousness in the Genesis account (also in Hebrews noted for their example of walking by faith in God's promises). But that's not the entire story. We also are made aware of these men's flaws (i.e., sins). We see Noah getting drunk (post-flood) and Abraham lying to save his skin. Later on, he also goes along with a scheme initiated by his wife (Sarah) to have a child with a slave girl (Hagar, who bore Ishmael out of this concocted plan). Though God had previously made it clear that Abraham's promised child (Isaac) was to be through Sarah (who, btw, was incredibly old), he disobeyed (i.e., sinned) by pursuing the conception of the promised child through the slave girl instead. Those are just a few examples.

Personal righteousness throughout the Old and New Testaments is extremely important, but no sinner has been or will be justified by a tally sheet of good works (Romans 3:28). Paul's strong statements against human depravity, the universal sinfulness of mankind (Jew and Gentile alike) in Romans 1-3 is not to say that all men are equally sinful. Furthermore, Paul's words ought not be misconstrued to teach that there is essentially no distinction or line of demarcation between the righteous and the wicked (which is patently false and is disproved throughout all the Scriptures). The point is simply no one ever has made the cut by works and no one ever will. So Paul goes on to show how Christ's propitiation for sin through his death on the cross is the grounds of our being declared righteous before God (in context, this speaks of our forgiveness for sins), appropriated by faith. Christ's blood (sacrificial death) is the basis for the sinner's acquittal (or justification).

[JusticeMachine]

If Chist is the only way, are we to assume that none were saved until he came? Even Abraham, David, Noah..etc?

[The Remonstrant]

If Chist is the only way, are we to assume that none were saved until he came? Even Abraham, David, Noah..etc?

Clearly not. In Hebrews Noah and Abraham (among many others) are commended for dying in faith (i.e, persevering in obedient faith to God's promises to death [11:13]). Earlier in Hebrews it is made quite explicit that the animal sacrifices under the Mosaic covenant never actually remitted anyone's sins: "For it is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins" (Hebrews 10:4 HCSB). (In context see chapters 8-10). The law and sacrifices are said to have been a shadow (much in the same way Paul describes "holy days" [i.e., Sabbath-keeping, festivals and the like] in Colossians 2:16, 17) of the reality needing to be offered time after time and year after year under the old covenant, but Christ's sacrifice needed only to be made once (10:11-14).

In short, you could say Noah and Abraham were saved through faith in light of Christ's sacrifice (which was yet to come). "He was foreknown before the foundation of the world but was made manifest in the last times for the sake of you who through him are believers in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God" (1 Peter 1:20, 21 ESV [emphasis added]). (In context, it is clear that Peter had in mind Christ's redemptive work on the cross being ordained even prior to the world being created [see vv. 18, 19].) In this sense, I am saying that Christ's propitiation for sin was (1) certain to have occurred in the divine plan and (2) could not have been thwarted; there was no "plan B" for the cross (which may disagree with the views of some Arminians or open theists, though in no way am I intending to insinuate that God ordained the fall of Adam).

Noah and Abraham, were saved, yes, but only in light of the cross work of Christ which was yet future from their place in human history. Only the blood of Christ can actually remit sins (as Hebrews makes abundantly clear).

[George Blaisdell]

The appropriation of the Righteousness of Christ is attained by DEATH...
First: Christ's Death and Resurrection...
Then: Our entry into Christ through our death...

Rom_5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin;
and so death passed upon all men, for which cause all have sinned:
Rom_5:21 That as sin hath reigned unto death,
even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
Rom_7:4 * Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ;
Rom_6:3 Know ye not, that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death?
1Co_12:13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body,
Gal_3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Luk_9:23 If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me.

So that both Baptism and discipleship are by the Cross...

Arsenios

[hedrick]

Right. It's pretty clear that in many (most?) places "righteous" is being used to mean something closer to faithful. It doesn't imply "completely righteous such that they could earn their salvation purely by works." Indeed if N T Wright is correct, in the OT it typically refers to people as members in good standing of the covenant people, and not as morally perfect.

It's possible to read even Romans that way. Through our union with Christ, we die to sin and are raised to new life. Because we are part of Christ in faith, God considers us justified, i.e. made righteous. He credits us with Christ's righteousness, something we haven't yet really earned. In this context, righteousness can be understood either as covenant status or as moral status, and in fact may be both. God treats us as being better than we are (moral status), and also considers us members of Christ's people (covenant status). While we're being credited with something we don't deserve, it's not a pure fiction. Because of course in Christ we are no longer "slaves of sin", but have become new people (repented in the deepest sense) and become servants of Christ. While sin is no longer the "true us", we do of course continue failing on a pretty regular basis, so we're certainly far from morally perfect. (At least I am.)

It seems to me that people in the OT could certainly have the same experience. They wouldn't recognize Christ as its basis, but they would still have faith in God as they understood him (and he was the Trinity even then, even though they didn't know it). And thus they could still be new people, and be considered righteous.

The point is that we can neither allow the Gospel to become other pure moralism or push imputation so far that there's no actual change to being new people. It's pretty clear that Christ's righteousness is imputed precisely because we are new people in him.

[George Blaisdell]

Right. It's pretty clear that in many (most?) places "righteous" is being used to mean something closer to faithful. It doesn't imply "completely righteous such that they could earn their salvation purely by works." Indeed if N T Wright is correct, in the OT it typically refers to people as members in good standing of the covenant people, and not as morally perfect.

It's possible to read even Romans that way. Through our union with Christ, we die to sin and are raised to new life. Because we are part of Christ in faith, God considers us justified, i.e. made righteous. He credits us with Christ's righteousness, something we haven't yet really earned. In this context, righteousness can be understood either as covenant status or as moral status, and in fact may be both. God treats us as being better than we are (moral status), and also considers us members of Christ's people (covenant status). While we're being credited with something we don't deserve, it's not a pure fiction. Because of course in Christ we are no longer "slaves of sin", but have become new people (repented in the deepest sense) and become servants of Christ. While sin is no longer the "true us", we do of course continue failing on a pretty regular basis, so we're certainly far from morally perfect. (At least I am.)

It seems to me that people in the OT could certainly have the same experience. They wouldn't recognize Christ as its basis, but they would still have faith in God as they understood him (and he was the Trinity even then, even though they didn't know it). And thus they could still be new people, and be considered righteous.

The point is that we can neither allow the Gospel to become other pure moralism or push imputation so far that there's no actual change to being new people. It's pretty clear that Christ's righteousness is imputed precisely because we are new people in him.

Righteousness is right relationship with God, and the only right relationship with God is repentance, and this is found in both the Old and the New Covenants...
And the Salvation of God's Righteous is also found in both Covenants...
As David writes in Psalm 50/51 "Restore unto me the JOY of Thy Salvation, and RENEW a RIGHT [as in righteous] Spirit within me..."
And in terms of experience, I do not think that a person can discern all that easily the difference between Old and New Covenant Salvation...
Yet Christ says of the greatest of the Old Covenant Prophets, John the Fore-Runner of Christ: "Yet the LEAST in the Kingdom of Heaven is GREATER than he..."
And the difference is BAPTISM INTO CHRIST, the Holy Spirit of Christ abiding [as did the Dove in Christ's Baptism] WITHIN the Christian...

So that as MEMBERS of the BODY of Christ by Baptism INTO Christ, we are ONE with Christ Who is our Head...

That righteousness is Christ's, and ours by participation in Him in repentance from self,
embracing the Cross of suffering in Him Who suffered for us...
And if we do not, then the abiding of the Holy Spirit we received will be in vain, and we will die in our sins...

Repentance is unto our last breath and heartbeat...
It is the CONDITION of our Salvation in Christ...
It is voluntary and willful...
And enabled by the Grace of God...
And lived by us who love Him...

The difference between Old and New Covenant Salvation is this ABIDING of the Holy Spirit within, which is given to us in the Baptism of Christ... The OT Saints died and went to Hades to await Christ's arrival and liberation, whereas for the New Covenant, Scripture tells us that they "...shall not taste of death..." for they have already, through Baptism, embraced the Life of Christ's Death to the world and His Resurrection unto the Life of the Age to Come...

Arsenios

[George Blaisdell]

If Chist is the only way, are we to assume that none were saved until he came? Even Abraham, David, Noah..etc?

Better not make THAT assumption...!!



Arsenios

[The Remonstrant]

BTW, you're welcome, JM.

[ttruscott]

Although the word foreknow (Strong's G4267 - proginōskō) is translated into English variously as foreordain (KJV 1 Peter 1:20); chose (NIV 1 Peter 1:20) and even pre-destined (Weymouth NT),

chosen (Strong's G1586 - eklegomai ) seems to be only translated by chosen or words implying chosen like selected, and the word elect.

Yet, though these words are closely intertwined they are not exact copies of thought:
Chosen ≠ predestined
Ephesians 1:4
4 For he chose (Strong's G1586) us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight.
5 In love he predestined (Strong's G4309) us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ,

Foreknow ≠ chosen
Romans 8:29 (1 Peter 1:20, Eph. 1:5)
For those God foreknew/knew in advance (Strong's G4267) he also predestined/fashioned/chose (Strong's G4309) to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

The use of two words, (almost side by side), though often translated for similar thoughts, must show a distinction in the thinking of the writer.

As for Christ being elected as per 1 Peter 1:20 He was chosen/foreknown/foreordained (Strong's G4267) before the creation/foundation of the world, would indicate that foreknowledge or foreordination would more closely apply, not election.

We are elected (G1586): Ephesians 1:4 For he chose (Strong's G1586) us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. and angels are elected (G1588): 1 Timothy 5:21 (Strong's G1588) I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels... but Christ is foreknown/foreordained (G4267): 1 Peter 1:20 He was chosen/foreknown/foreordained (Strong's G4267) before the creation/foundation of the world...

Then I considered that the Gospel was preached to all as per Colossians 1:23 ...If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven:

When was the gospel preached to all of creation? It seems to be written as a past event from Paul's point of view, but does that negate future people like us? In other words, were we there when this gospel was openly proclaimed as it implies?

IF Pre-Conception Existence is correct in assuming that 'every creature under heaven' was in fact created at the same time in Sheol and IF that is where we had our true (not fake) free (uncoerced by anything) will choices as ingenuous innocents unimpeded by any taint of enslaving sin,

as part of the full information necessary to make our choices true choices and not mere guesses, HE would have told us that if we bowed to/accepted HIS plan for our creation we would be chosen (elected) to be conformed to the image of HIS son whom HE introduced to us all as HIS Christ chosen to fulfill the gospel.

In other words, election was HIS promise to any who chose to accept HIS plan for our creation that no matter how or why we might fall into sin from then on, He would never stop loving us and doing all that was necessary to save us from sin, to redeem us and bring us to holiness in conformity with our true free will decision to accept HIS will for us. That is HE preached the gospel. Election was the promise, the gospel was the practical method to fulfill the promise if it became necessary.

Missing from this is
What IS a true free will choice?
How is it different from our ordinary attenuated (ie non-free) will?
Why are some sins forgivable and others not?
Why do I think that election/predestination took place after creation no matter how people more clever than me understand certain scriptures.
...but all in good time.

Oh, and about 1 Peter 1:20 He was foreknown before the creation/foundation of the world, look at how the mystery may hide...IF HE was foreordained, all is simply about the gospel as I suggest but if He was foreknown we must ask, foreknown by whom? Since it can't be that He was foreknown by GOD ie Himself, then it may hint that we foreknew Him, so that fore means before life on earth, not before creation which many never consider due to the prevailing created on earth theory.

Peace to you all,

Ted

[FarEastBird]

How do we justify Noah and Abrahman, and David being righteous in Gods sight if Romans is taken litterally?

The answer is also written in Romans 11:29-32:

29For the gifts and calling of God [are] without repentance. 30For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.

First, what do Abraham and the "blinded" Jews in common? They are both are under unbelief because of their "ignorance" of the truth. Abraham, David, and of others who lived before Christ, are ignorant of the truth of the salvation as brought to us by Christ through the gospel. Likewise, the blinded Jews, being blinded, fall also in unbelief. Thus is verse 32.

It is this very reason of the Jews ignorance that Salvation came to us, Gentiles. For in their ignorance, they come to work the law, and failed. Thus it made them(Israel) not bettter than the Gentiles. We thus learned this in the Gospel that the Israelites cannot attain salvation by works. And that we learn that it also includes us! We also fail in words. And by which now we believed that it was God's "mercy" that we(Gentiles) attained salvation, not of any works. And it is this very same reason of faith that we received, by which we also believed that the blinded Jews, as well a Abraham, David, and others, were saved! For regardless we received the faith OF Christ it does not make it that it is because of our works; it is a GIFT. The same, God can give the same faith OF Christ, to everyone whom he had chosen in the resurrection. Thus is verses 30 and 31.

The salvation that we believed has nothing to do with having faith IN Christ. We preach Christ sufferring on the cross as salvation for all the elect. Regardless the blinded Jews, nor Abraham and David, had not known this mystery, they were saved through Christ redemption in the cross. Thus is verse 29.

The mystery of the cross is indeed a mystery of Christ's salvation itself. Our understanding of this mystery speaks of the faith OF Christ, which not all who believe IN Christ possess. We believe that it is the same mystery that is given only to the elect alone.

FEB